Question on CAC price Guide: previously is it ok to ask question about CAC?

ajaan

Is the CAC price Guide accurate when valuing coins or is it strictly coin by coin. I have a 1954 Proof Set CAC 65-67 and I'm wondering if the price guide is real world accurate or not.

MFeld

If it isn’t, a whole lot of forum members are in big trouble.😉

cameonut2011

Maybe this is a perfect place to ask a question so I don't get the blame and can put it on you two... So do CACG coins sell for a premium compared to PCGS CAC coins or vice versa? How about CACG v. PCGS without the bean? Is CACG a more conservative grading team than CAC the sticker company?

MFeld

@cameonut2011 said:
Maybe this is a perfect place to ask a question so I don't get the blame and can put it on you two... So do CACG coins sell for a premium compared to PCGS CAC coins or vice versa? How about CACG v. PCGS without the bean? Is CACG a more conservative grading team than CAC the sticker company?

I haven’t been keeping statistics, but my observations are as follows:
In general,
1) I think PCGS/CAC coins tend to sell for more than CACG coins. The thought is that two expert grading opinions are better than one.

2) I think that CACG coins tend to sell for more than non-stickered PCGS coins. The thinking here is that CACG grades more strictly than PCGS.

3) I don’t think that CACG grades more conservatively than CAC.

marcmoish

@ajaan said:
If yes, I'll edit and ask my question.

of course it is!
Worse case, you share a cell with this guy; Unknown: Content Removed

cameonut2011

@marcmoish said:

@ajaan said:
If yes, I'll edit and ask my question.

of course it is!
Worse case, you share a cell with this guy; Unknown: Content Removed

Yeah, but it looks like they forgot how to unban him. He still shows as unknown user with content removed for ALL of his old posts even though the bars have been removed and you can communicate with him by PM.

MFeld

Deleted.

coinbuf

The CAC price guide is as accurate as any other price guide, sometimes spot on and other times not close. As with any guide or TPG it comes down to the coin.

MFeld

@ajaan said:
Is the CAC price Guide accurate when valuing coins or is it strictly coin by coin. I have a 1954 Proof CAC 65-67 and I'm wondering if the price guide is real world accurate or not.

What is a “1954 Proof CAC 65-67”?
Whatever it is, check for auction comps. When available, they can sometimes be considerably more useful than price guides.

Desert Moon

@cameonut2011 said:
Maybe this is a perfect place to ask a question so I don't get the blame and can put it on you two... So do CACG coins sell for a premium compared to PCGS CAC coins or vice versa? How about CACG v. PCGS without the bean? Is CACG a more conservative grading team than CAC the sticker company?

My views may be different than Marks on some of this based on my own personal experience:

1. PCGS/CAC versus CACG prices. Depends on the series and the coin, but on average, I have not seen any difference in prices for similar coins of a specific type, date, mint, as long as both coins are about equal in pq. But, it takes longer on average to sell a CACG coin than a PCGS/CAC. More folks want the latter simply bc of the registry. But value, under the conditions of equality? Same.
   .
2. CACG graded coins versus PCGS no CAC will depend on the coin. Guides are only guides, but by definition, and assuming the PCGS coin went to CAC, the CACG coin is a pq coin and the PCGS coin is not. So CACG coin sells for more under those conditions.
   .
3. My experience has been CACG is more conservative than CAC on average. I've had coins that did not get graded, even in the next grade down, when crossing to CACG, only to sell and see them with green stickers on them later by someone else submitting to CAC. But again, this is limited experience and they are supposed to be using the same grading standards. But it is different grading teams so there are bound to be differences.

ajaan

@MFeld said:

@ajaan said:
Is the CAC price Guide accurate when valuing coins or is it strictly coin by coin. I have a 1954 Proof CAC 65-67 and I'm wondering if the price guide is real world accurate or not.

What is a “1954 Proof CAC 65-67”?
Whatever it is, check for auction comps. When available, they can sometimes be considerably more useful than price guides.

Proof set

BigFrankie

For what I collect, my experience is the CAC Price Guide is directionally very good. That is my starting point.

Subsequently, I zero in on a price by looking at auction comps, considering the actual coin. In addition, there are dealers that have sales archives.

Walkerfan

I think it’s more accurate than the PCGS and NGC price guide. The former is too high while the latter is too low. I think CAC price guide is the most realistic. But at the end of the day, it all depends on the coin itself. Super PQ examples can fetch multiples of price guide figures, while more pedestrian examples can fly well below the radar and not do well, at all.

Desert Moon

@BigFrankie said:
For what I collect, my experience is the CAC Price Guide is directionally very good. That is my starting point.

Subsequently, I zero in on a price by looking at auction comps, considering the actual coin. In addition, there are dealers that have sales archives.

That is a good approach except I have found that alot of the time, the best, pq coins are not going to auction, they are trading privately, so the auction prices are frequently skewed towards not the most pq coins for a grade and type. Rick Snow has been saying this for decades on Flying Eagle and Indian Cents, I can only concur on my experience for the past 3 years...............

cccoins

I think that PCGS coins with the CAC sticker are more valuable than CACG coins because they fit into the PCGS registry set.

winesteven

Here are my thoughts on three separate aspects of this discussion (please make sure to take the time to read my #3):

1. While I do believe in general that CACG grades more conservatively than PCGS, I agree that coins graded by PCGS that merit CAC stickers sell easier, and perhaps at slightly higher prices, for the two reasons mentioned above - the concept of two opinions versus one, and the PCGS Registry restriction of not allowing other TPG coins into their Registry. Unfortunately, I am a slave to the PCGS Registry, so I own no CACG coins. If the PCGS Registry allowed CACG coins with no penalty in their registry, those are holders I’d actually mainly be buying!
2. Also as noted above, guides are only guides, and using actual auction data (with adjusting for eye appeal) is the better way to go. I also agree that the “accuracy” of the CAC Pricing Guide is dependent on the coin series. I’ve just completed my 24-coin Proof Barber Dime Set (PCGS Current Rank #2). What I found for this series is typically the PCGS Price Guide is a LOT higher than the CAC Price Guide, and the coins sell for somewhere in between the two guides. Here are five very clear examples, all PCGS w/CAC stickers (all auction prices I paid include the buyers premium): 1895 PR67CAM - CAC guide $4,500, PCGS guide $7,750, I paid $6,000 from a dealer. 1908 PR67CAM - CAC guide $4,500, PCGS guide $6,750, I paid $5,770 from Heritage. 1910 PR67CAM - CAC guide $4,500, PCGS guide $9,500, I paid $8,540 from Stacks. 1912 PR67CAM - CAC guide $7,000, PCGS guide $11,000, I paid $8,250 from a dealer. 1914 PR66CAM - CAC guide $3,000, PCGS guide $7,000, I paid $4,750 from a dealer. Notice with two of these the PCGS guide is more than double the CAC guide!
3. Something that many collectors, and some dealers don’t know, is that a CAC sticker on a PCGS plus graded coin only says that in the opinion of CAC, that coin is ONLY solid at the whole grade number. So a coin graded PR67+ by PCGS with a CAC sticker is only solid as a 67 in CAC’s opinion. Maybe in their opinion it’s solid as a 67+, but maybe not. There’s no way to know! But with CACG, their plus grades matter. If CACG grades a coin PR67+, in their opinion THAT coin is indeed solid as a PR67+. In the example of a PR67+ PCGS coin with a CAC sticker, there is ONLY one opinion saying it’s a 67+, NOT two. While the CACG 67+ is also only one opinion, I value that opinion more than the PCGS opinion!
4. As a separate point for information purposes, a sticker on a PCGS PR67CAM coin says TWO things - in CAC’s opinion the coin is solid as 67, AND also in CAC’s opinion, the coin merits the CAM suffix! That’s why I often found that with high grade Cameo Proof Barber Dimes, there are many that won’t sticker. For example, there are 45 of the 1894’s graded PR66CAM (27 by PCGS and 18 by NGC). Of those 45 graded PR66CAM, only 13 merit a CAC sticker!

I hope you find this helpful.

Steve

ajaan

Thank you for the detailed info Steve.

GoldFinger1969

I know JA and CAC have tended to be tough graders of gold in general and Saints in particular...was wondering if anybody had any thoughts on how the whole CACG vs. PCGS+CAC variable was playing out with $20 Saints.

It's still very early in the ballgame and there isn't tons of inventory or sales data to look at, but my early looks were that pricing for CACG Saints was way above PCGS Only and even above PCGS+CAC...probably because of the scarcity factor so that buyers were paying up.

winesteven

@GoldFinger1969 said:
I know JA and CAC have tended to be tough graders of gold in general and Saints in particular...was wondering if anybody had any thoughts on how the whole CACG vs. PCGS+CAC variable was playing out with $20 Saints.

It's still very early in the ballgame and there isn't tons of inventory or sales data to look at, but my early looks were that pricing for CACG Saints was way above PCGS Only and even above PCGS+CAC...probably because of the scarcity factor so that buyers were paying up.

This doesn’t directly answer your question, but both CAC stickering NJ and CACG in Virginia are tough on gold due to the “other” thing they look for, besides determining in their opinion the grade. They also ask themselves, “Has this coin undergone any surface treatments that in our opinion are unacceptable, even though it may be acceptable to the other TPG’s?”

My understanding is many straight-graded pre-1933 gold coins get “knocked out” by both CAC and CACG for THAT reason! I believe that’s likely the reason the percentage of the pops of stickered 65 and 66 Saints is low. Looking at the most common, 1924 Saints, there are 16,543 graded MS66 (10,521 by PCGS and 6,022 by NGC). Of those 16,543, only 766 merit a CAC sticker! That’s less than 5%. While there are always exceptions to the following, my sense is most classic silver, copper and nickel coins run roughly 10% - 20% or so of the pops getting stickered, not 5%.

Edit - See Mark’s correction below!

Steve

MFeld

@winesteven said:

@GoldFinger1969 said:
I know JA and CAC have tended to be tough graders of gold in general and Saints in particular...was wondering if anybody had any thoughts on how the whole CACG vs. PCGS+CAC variable was playing out with $20 Saints.

It's still very early in the ballgame and there isn't tons of inventory or sales data to look at, but my early looks were that pricing for CACG Saints was way above PCGS Only and even above PCGS+CAC...probably because of the scarcity factor so that buyers were paying up.

This doesn’t directly answer your question, but both CAC stickering NJ and CACG in Virginia are tough on gold due to the “other” thing they look for, besides determining in their opinion the grade. They also ask themselves, “Has this coin undergone any surface treatments that in our opinion are unacceptable, even though it may be acceptable to the other TPG’s?”

My understanding is many straight-graded pre-1933 gold coins get “knocked out” by both CAC and CACG for THAT reason! I believe that’s likely the reason the percentage of the pops of stickered 65 and 66 Saints is low. Looking at the most common, 1924 Saints, there are 16,543 graded MS66 (10,521 by PCGS and 6,022 by NGC). Of those 16,543, only 766 merit a CAC sticker! That’s less than 5%. While there are always exceptions to the following, my sense is most classic silver, copper and nickel coins run roughly 10% - 20% or so of the pops getting stickered, not 5%.

Steve

Steve

Steve, if I’m understanding you correctly, I’ll have to disagree with the idea that the CAC percentage of the pops of stickered 65 and 66 Saints is low due to “surface treatments”. While I see a lot of that for early gold coins, I don’t think it’s the case with Saints. I believe that by far, the main issue with Saints is stacking (or cabinet) friction, that results in flatness on Liberty’s breast and knee area. And both CAC and CACG are less forgiving of that.

winesteven

@MFeld said:

@winesteven said:

@GoldFinger1969 said:
I know JA and CAC have tended to be tough graders of gold in general and Saints in particular...was wondering if anybody had any thoughts on how the whole CACG vs. PCGS+CAC variable was playing out with $20 Saints.

It's still very early in the ballgame and there isn't tons of inventory or sales data to look at, but my early looks were that pricing for CACG Saints was way above PCGS Only and even above PCGS+CAC...probably because of the scarcity factor so that buyers were paying up.

This doesn’t directly answer your question, but both CAC stickering NJ and CACG in Virginia are tough on gold due to the “other” thing they look for, besides determining in their opinion the grade. They also ask themselves, “Has this coin undergone any surface treatments that in our opinion are unacceptable, even though it may be acceptable to the other TPG’s?”

My understanding is many straight-graded pre-1933 gold coins get “knocked out” by both CAC and CACG for THAT reason! I believe that’s likely the reason the percentage of the pops of stickered 65 and 66 Saints is low. Looking at the most common, 1924 Saints, there are 16,543 graded MS66 (10,521 by PCGS and 6,022 by NGC). Of those 16,543, only 766 merit a CAC sticker! That’s less than 5%. While there are always exceptions to the following, my sense is most classic silver, copper and nickel coins run roughly 10% - 20% or so of the pops getting stickered, not 5%.

Steve

Steve

Steve, if I’m understanding you correctly, I’ll have to disagree with the idea that the CAC percentage of the pops of stickered 65 and 66 Saints is low due to “surface treatments”. While I see a lot of that for early gold coins, I don’t think it’s the case with Saints. I believe that by far, the main issue with Saints is stacking (or cabinet) friction, that results in flatness on Liberty’s breast and knee area.

Mark - I’ll absolutely defer to you, as your real life expertise is far greater than mine! I noticed that on a lot of gold coins the % of the pop stickered is remarkably low compared to coins of other metals, so I erroneously concluded with Saints it was due to surface treatments. I stand corrected! Apparently, the flatness on Liberty’s breast and knee areas are unacceptable to CAC and CACG, but not a problem at all for PCGS and NGC for those graded 65 and 66.

Thanks.

Steve

ajaan

Might be a stupid question. Does CAC mean stickered and CACG mean the coin is in a CAC slab?

winesteven

@ajaan said:
Might be a stupid question. Does CAC mean stickered and CACG mean the coin is in a CAC slab?

Yes it does, but it is NOT a stupid question!

Steve

ajaan

@winesteven said:

@ajaan said:
Might be a stupid question. Does CAC mean stickered and CACG mean the coin is in a CAC slab?

Yes it does, but it is NOT a stupid question!

Steve

Thanks, so can I assume a CACG coin can't get a CAC sticker? This is the last time I'll type CAC in this thread, I promise.

winesteven

@ajaan said:

@winesteven said:

@ajaan said:
Might be a stupid question. Does CAC mean stickered and CACG mean the coin is in a CAC slab?

Yes it does, but it is NOT a stupid question!

Steve

Thanks, so can I assume a CACG coin can't get a CAC sticker? This is the last time I'll type CAC in this thread, I promise.

True, but the image of a CAC sticker is built onto each CACG slab, lol.

Steve

MFeld

@ajaan said:

@winesteven said:

@ajaan said:
Might be a stupid question. Does CAC mean stickered and CACG mean the coin is in a CAC slab?

Yes it does, but it is NOT a stupid question!

Steve

Thanks, so can I assume a CACG coin can't get a CAC sticker? This is the last time I'll type CAC in this thread, I promise.

Correct - at least with respect to your question. But only time will tell whether you type “CAC” again in this thread. 😉

DisneyFan

@winesteven said:

My understanding is many straight-graded pre-1933 gold coins get “knocked out” by both CAC and CACG for THAT reason! I believe that’s likely the reason the percentage of the pops of stickered 65 and 66 Saints is low. Looking at the most common, 1924 Saints, there are 16,543 graded MS66 (10,521 by PCGS and 6,022 by NGC). Of those 16,543, only 766 merit a CAC sticker! That’s less than 5%. While there are always exceptions to the following, my sense is most classic silver, copper and nickel coins run roughly 10% - 20% or so of the pops getting stickered, not 5%.

Edit - See Mark’s correction below!

Steve

My impression is the CAC Price Guide tends to be on the high side when it comes to valuing gold. In your example of MS66 1924 Saints, CAC value is $8,250 & PCGS $5,250. Great Collections has sold 37 of them with the last high sale in March, 2025 (!) of $6,261.00. The earlier recent average appears to be in the low 5s.

Given the cost of $75 or $63.75 for failures and shipping, collectors may calculate it isn't worth the risk of submitting an almost bullion date given CAC/CACG's proclivity to fail Saints.

cameonut2011

CAC should review CACG coins. I see CACG as no different than any other grading service.

MFeld

@cameonut2011 said:
CAC should review CACG coins. I see CACG as no different than any other grading service.

That would give the impression of potentially significant bias. It would be the same thing as PCGS starting a stickering service and accepting PCGS graded coins (among others) for submission. That’s a no go.

cameonut2011

@MFeld said:

@cameonut2011 said:
CAC should review CACG coins. I see CACG as no different than any other grading service.

That would give the impression of potentially significant bias. It would be the same thing as PCGS starting a stickering service and accepting PCGS graded coins (among others) for submission. That’s a no go.

Does the guaranteed crossover of CAC coins to CACG not also have the same effect? No one has ever questioned it.

winesteven

@cameonut2011 said:

@MFeld said:

@cameonut2011 said:
CAC should review CACG coins. I see CACG as no different than any other grading service.

That would give the impression of potentially significant bias. It would be the same thing as PCGS starting a stickering service and accepting PCGS graded coins (among others) for submission. That’s a no go.

Does the guaranteed crossover of CAC coins to CACG not also have the same effect? No one has ever questioned it.

The important reason is that in theory they use the same standards.

Steve

cameonut2011

@winesteven said:

@cameonut2011 said:

@MFeld said:

@cameonut2011 said:
CAC should review CACG coins. I see CACG as no different than any other grading service.

That would give the impression of potentially significant bias. It would be the same thing as PCGS starting a stickering service and accepting PCGS graded coins (among others) for submission. That’s a no go.

Does the guaranteed crossover of CAC coins to CACG not also have the same effect? No one has ever questioned it.

The important reason is that in theory they use the same standards.

Steve

I understand and agree that this is the argument, but it ignores reality that we are all human and there will always be differences even among elite experts.

winesteven

@cameonut2011 said:

@winesteven said:

@cameonut2011 said:

@MFeld said:

@cameonut2011 said:
CAC should review CACG coins. I see CACG as no different than any other grading service.

That would give the impression of potentially significant bias. It would be the same thing as PCGS starting a stickering service and accepting PCGS graded coins (among others) for submission. That’s a no go.

Does the guaranteed crossover of CAC coins to CACG not also have the same effect? No one has ever questioned it.

The important reason is that in theory they use the same standards.

Steve

I understand and agree that this is the argument, but it ignores reality that we are all human and there will always be differences even among elite experts.

Yes, everyone makes errors. If a coin is graded “too conservatively”, each service offers some type of “Reconsideration” service. I’ve gotten plenty of pluses that way at PCGS. If a coin is overgraded, each service will make financial amends. But you “ain’t gonna see” CAC stickering judge CACG holders. Virtually all of us would see that as a money grab by CAC, and JA is way too “Collector friendly” for him to allow that to happen!

cameonut2011

@winesteven said:
JA is way to “Collector friendly” for him to allow that to happen!

I’ll give you that. I’m really thankful for CAC and CACG as it is now my escape hatch for NGC CAC coins. Bye, bye ugly white prongs and fraudulently voided guarantee.

MFeld

@cameonut2011 said:

@MFeld said:

@cameonut2011 said:
CAC should review CACG coins. I see CACG as no different than any other grading service.

That would give the impression of potentially significant bias. It would be the same thing as PCGS starting a stickering service and accepting PCGS graded coins (among others) for submission. That’s a no go.

Does the guaranteed crossover of CAC coins to CACG not also have the same effect? No one has ever questioned it.

I think that’s different enough to avoid the same effect in perception. For one thing, you know the outcome in advance. And at the same time, it ends up being an affirmation of CAC’s grade guarantee.

justindan

It appears for some series CACG is gaining ground. After being recently asked the same questions related to CACG I found this recent data from GC. The 1929 year showed some outliers and wasn't a true representation of a solid win for CACG, but I was shocked to see this. CAC Price guide for both of these is $1,400 for what it's worth still shy of their number.

justindan

In the $10 series, both Indians and Liberties still appear to be selling below PCGS/CAC, particularly as you move toward the conditional rarity extremes.

Coinobsessed

My experience with CAC pricing is mainly with deep cameo proof coins. They are so far under market at times it is ridiculous. I would love to buy coins at their prices.
PCGS seems to rely on auction records. So if a coin hasn’t been auctioned in a while the price can be way off.
I tend to rely on auction prices as a starting point.

justindan

@Coinobsessed said:
My experience with CAC pricing is mainly with deep cameo proof coins. They are so far under market at times it is ridiculous. I would love to buy coins at their prices.
PCGS seems to rely on auction records. So if a coin hasn’t been auctioned in a while the price can be way off.
I tend to rely on auction prices as a starting point.

What series?

Cougar1978

Players have their various opinions about TPG. For me it is the coin and whether it’s PQ or not. Many super toned coins get high demand, bidding.

I do cost plus in pricing material. Of course PQ material might have a higher markup factor. I do refer to CDN CPG and have studied their markup structure. Then may look at cost and where the coin falls. ABC then appropriate markup factor. Sometimes study pricing how others price their material.

I do CACG and other TPG. Pricing varies on cost, markup factor, whether A,B,C etc. I also consider population.

cameonut2011

@Cougar1978 said:
Players have their various opinions about TPG. For me it is the coin and whether it’s PQ or not. Many super toned coins get high demand, bidding.

I do cost plus in pricing material. Of course PQ material might have a higher markup factor. I do refer to CDN CPG and have studied their markup structure. Then may look at cost and where the coin falls. ABC then appropriate markup factor. Sometimes study pricing how others price their material.

I do CACG and other TPG. Pricing varies on cost, markup factor, whether A,B,C etc. I also consider population.

What’s the etc? Do you trade D and F quality coins too?